I don't like the trade for two reasons, neither of which involves Gerald Wallace, who i really like as a player.
1) He's not a game changer. If Deron was not staying (and im not saying he is not) he's not changing his mind because they acquired Gerald Wallace.
2) For the price the Nets gave up, they could have gotten Paul Pierce, or thrown in another pick and went after J Smith or Aldrige actually. It felt like they had a good idea, but overpaid.

It may work out good but i still think they overpaid and they upped the risk level if they lose Deron. The Nets were all in, and they pushed more chips to the center of the table.

I disagree. I think that Gerald Wallace is an all-star caliber player and while he may not be a franchise changer, all-star caliber is what it is. He's one of the best defenders in the league, a great shot-blocker who gets lots of steals. And he's one of the best rebounding SF's in the league. Stats never look on the Blazers. But he took that Bobcats team to the playoffs and he's still got a few years left.

Deron is a basketball player. He should want to play with great players. Wallace is a better player than Boozer ever was. He has Brook and Brooks. They need a big-time player. He gets that in Dallas, but he has his team in Brooklyn that is better on paper than what Dwight has in Orlando. Avery might be a problem tho. They still have Houston's pick if Houston somehow makes the playoffs. They're gonna be playing in the City.

And they had no shot at LaMarcus Aldridge. Portland cannot be stupid enough to trade a 26 year old max player who makes less than $13Million a year. He's one of the 3 PF's in the NBA that will stand above the rest for the next 7-8 years. Porltand just can't be that stupid. Josh Smith is a maybe, but Wallace isn't far behind Smith.

Lastly, it's all about giving up a pick when you could have signed him as a free agent. In fact, they could have offered a lot of money Batum. If they offered Batum some Wallace money, Portland would likely not match...at least you'd think. They're not making the playoffs this year.

I disagree. I think that Gerald Wallace is an all-star caliber player and while he may not be a franchise changer, all-star caliber is what it is. He's one of the best defenders in the league, a great shot-blocker who gets lots of steals. And he's one of the best rebounding SF's in the league. Stats never look on the Blazers. But he took that Bobcats team to the playoffs and he's still got a few years left.

Deron is a basketball player. He should want to play with great players. Wallace is a better player than Boozer ever was. He has Brook and Brooks. They need a big-time player. He gets that in Dallas, but he has his team in Brooklyn that is better on paper than what Dwight has in Orlando. Avery might be a problem tho. They still have Houston's pick if Houston somehow makes the playoffs. They're gonna be playing in the City.

And they had no shot at LaMarcus Aldridge. Portland cannot be stupid enough to trade a 26 year old max player who makes less than $13Million a year. He's one of the 3 PF's in the NBA that will stand above the rest for the next 7-8 years. Porltand just can't be that stupid. Josh Smith is a maybe, but Wallace isn't far behind Smith.

Lastly, it's all about giving up a pick when you could have signed him as a free agent. In fact, they could have offered a lot of money Batum. If they offered Batum some Wallace money, Portland would likely not match...at least you'd think. They're not making the playoffs this year.

May as well have offered that pick that was signed thru next season.

i still don't get it, i don't disagree with any point you said but seriously, i don't get people arguing Deron would stay because they got Dwight, and now changing that to "its ok, they got Gerald Wallace". That's not logicial.

Basically i think risk outweights reward here AND that they could have got him cheaper.

I don't like the trade for two reasons, neither of which involves Gerald Wallace, who i really like as a player.
1) He's not a game changer. If Deron was not staying (and im not saying he is not) he's not changing his mind because they acquired Gerald Wallace.
2) For the price the Nets gave up, they could have gotten Paul Pierce, or thrown in another pick and went after J Smith or Aldrige actually. It felt like they had a good idea, but overpaid.

It may work out good but i still think they overpaid and they upped the risk level if they lose Deron. The Nets were all in, and they pushed more chips to the center of the table.

i still don't get it, i don't disagree with any point you said but seriously, i don't get people arguing Deron would stay because they got Dwight, and now changing that to "its ok, they got Gerald Wallace". That's not logicial.

Basically i think risk outweights reward here AND that they could have got him cheaper.

It's clear the Nets are not well-run. And that, more than not having Dwight and settling for Wallace, is what could scare Williams away.

It's clear the Nets are not well-run. And that, more than not having Dwight and settling for Wallace, is what could scare Williams away.

Nets had no control in making Dwight opt in or out. The magic on fact were going to deal Howard to the nets for Lopez and Wallace in a 3 team trade. And Wallace was signed off by Williams. Management asked him and Williams approved saying he doesn't want to wait around for a rookie to develop.

Nets had no control in making Dwight opt in or out. The magic on fact were going to deal Howard to the nets for Lopez and Wallace in a 3 team trade. And Wallace was signed off by Williams. Management asked him and Williams approved saying he doesn't want to wait around for a rookie to develop.

I hadn't heard about that...if that's accurate then Deron better not be leaving.

If Gerald Wallace was an All-Star Caliber player, the Blazers wouldn't have been a less than .500 team like they were and are. Don't get me wrong, I like him as a player and he still can contribute, but I think it's pretty hilarious that Billy King gave up a top 10 pick for him, could have had better offers with that IMO.

Well right now the Nets are the 4th worst team in the league. Adding Gerald Wallace will get us a few wins, but I hope to remain around that 4-6 spot. I think there's also a statistic that the worst team in the league rarely gets the first overall pick, so hopefully it holds true again this year and we can sneak into the top 3.

If Gerald Wallace was an All-Star Caliber player, the Blazers wouldn't have been a less than .500 team like they were and are. Don't get me wrong, I like him as a player and he still can contribute, but I think it's pretty hilarious that Billy King gave up a top 10 pick for him, could have had better offers with that IMO.

He was one of the few guys playing hard. And playing too hard. Like niko said, he throws his body around even when up by 20...he was throwing his body around the night before, against the Knicks, down by 35.

He's still an all-star caliber player. One of the best SF's in the league. But the Nets aren't close, so if they're gonna give up a top 10 pick they should have gone after someone else or they should have offered the Rockets pick. I'm sure the Blazers would have taken that.

Terrible, we will have nothing to build around next season. Lopez will get overpaid and deron will join the mavs. Wallace isnt gonna get us into the playoffs. Pierce would of atleast make this team interesting. you can't tell me ainge wouldn't of made that deal.